podcast 307 – Two Readings of Mark – popular or esoteric? – Part 3
Dr. Michael Bird argues that in Mark, Jesus is “included in the identity” of God.
Dr. Michael Bird argues that in Mark, Jesus is “included in the identity” of God.
“Then Jesus, filled with the power of the Spirit, returned to Galilee… He began to teach in their synagogues and was praised by everyone.”
What the priest was thinking in charging Jesus with “blasphemy.”
Though he’s the first on record to use the Latin word “trinitas,” he was in fact a sort of unitarian.
Q & A time, forgiving sins, Cerberus, and some answers critiqued.
Is the question absurd? Or does it make sense in light of New Testament teachings?
In this post, I’ll take a crack at summarizing a lengthy salvo against Trinity monotheism launched by Daniel Howard-Snyder. Dan is well known and respected for his work on the problem of evil and in theory of knowledge. He has a hard-hitting and thorough style, very Alstonian (which is no accident). Generally, Dan is a nice guy, with a good sense of humor to boot.… Read More »Trinity Monotheism part 6: Attack of the Dan
Can we establish and defend the traditional view that God is not in our time?
God is immortal. But Jesus died. Does it follow that Jesus is not God?
A new book on the portrayal of Jesus in the Gospel According to John.
An ordinary believer with ordinary reading comprehension can see that “Sharp’s Rule” recommends misinterpretations.
“Of myself, I can do nothing.” Is this claim about Jesus’s self/person, or only about his “human nature”?
What did the famous Justin Martyr teach about Proverbs 8, and why?
Remember Moreland’s and Craig’s Cerberus analogy for the Trinity? (background here, whole series here) Daniel Howard-Snyder objected: come on, that’s clearly three dogs with overlapping bodies, not one dog with three centers of consciousness or with three minds. And they don’t want to say that the Trinity is three overlapping gods, so ditch the analogy already. The discussion degenerated into pointing at pictures and saying… Read More »The Cerberus analogy revisited
Is “the doctrine of the Trinity” essential to salvation? To Christianity?
Up to this point in Book 3 Richard has told us several things about love (caritas). We have wondered at his saying there isn’t a perfectly good person if he doesn’t love. We have sorted through some necessary conditions for love such that we wonder whether a perfectly good person p must love another person q if p is to be perfectly good. You might say we’ve been contemplating some divine ethics, or aesthetics, or whatever.
In the previous post I suggested how we might interpret what Richard means by saying (two) divine persons are equal and similar to one another, namely the divine persons have the same disposition of love and the same acts of love (see [T4’] and [T5’]). In the next part of Richard’s argument he returns to his metaphysics of the divine substance which he discussed in Books 1 and 2.Read More »Richard of St. Victor 7 – The Same Divine Substance (Scott)
Is reforming in light of scripture only acceptable in the distant past?
“Look, I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God!”
The original meaning of John 1, disentangled from later speculations about Trinity and two natures christology.